%0 Journal Article
%T Male Circumcision Does Not Reduce Sexual Function, Sensitivity or Satisfaction
%A Brian J. Morris
%A John N. Krieger
%J Advances in Sexual Medicine
%P 53-60
%@ 2164-5205
%D 2015
%I Scientific Research Publishing
%R 10.4236/asm.2015.53007
%X We disagree with Boyle¡¯s recent article questioning our systematic review in <em>Journal of Sexual Medicine</em> in 2013 (Volume 10, pages 2644-2657). In particular, he disputed the quality ranking we assigned to 7 of the 36 articles that met our inclusion criteria. These had been ranked for quality by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) grading system. We found that, ¡°the highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation or satisfaction.¡± This conclusion was supported by two randomized controlled trials, regarded as high-quality (1++) evidence and the majority of surveys and studies involving physiological measurements comparing uncircumcised and circumcised men. Here we explain why the 2 randomized controlled trials merit a 1++ ranking and why 4 reports that Boyle believes merit a higher ranking only meet the criteria set down for low quality (2<span style=\"font-size:6.5pt;font-family:;\" \"=\"\">?</span>) evidence according to the SIGN system. We therefore stand by our conclusions. These are supported by a meta-analysis of sexual dysfunctions and by a recent detailed systematic review of the histological correlates of male sexual sensation.
%K Circumcision
%K Erectile Function
%K Sexual Satisfaction
%K Premature Ejaculation
%K Penile Sensitivity
%U http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=57720